[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
Tom Potts wrote:
> What you fail to realise is that there must have been a clause about
> generating audit data in the original contract.
>
You'd think so wouldn't you? However, having been party to a situation
where a manager 'negotiated' a clause with a client for a 'first time
fix rate of 90%' in a technical support callcentre [1], I am not so
assured that contracts contain all that they should, but I am fairly
confident they do contain some things they shouldn't. I agree such a
clause *ought* to have been there, however I lack your confidence that
it actually was.
Kind regards,
Julian
[1] For non-techies this means that we promise to fix 90% of all
problems on the first attempt, or we paid the client through the nose.
After the laughter died down we realised he was serious and didn't know
what the problem was.
I told him, 10 calls:
1. Forgot the error message.
2. Only has one phone line [back in the age of dialup]
3. Isn't at the computer.
4. Ringing from *work* {yes we had them!]
5. Problem was last night and hasn't checked this morning.
6. Says the problem is mail, but doesn't know if they can get webpages
(or vice versa) - See 2.
I pointed out that even IF we fixed the remaining 4 we would have a 40%
fix rate. He went a bit green recalling the penalty clause he had
agreed to.
--
The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG
http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list
FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html